My Photo

Recent Comments

COMMENTS?

  • We love comments, but they are treated like letters to the editor -- only some are permanently published. Comments may be depublished or edited if they contain profanity or personal attacks or if they include statements that are false, defamatory, unethical, immoral, or illogical. Rude or inappropriate comments or spam may result in a permanent website ban (comments auto-deleted), so don't do that. Thanks.
  • Google

Like This Blog?

  • Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to Google

    Subscribe in Bloglines

    Add to My AOL

  • Word of the Day

    This Day in History

    In the News

    Quote of the Day

    Spelling Bee
    difficulty level:
    score: -
    please wait...
     
    spell the word:

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

35 entries categorized "Education"

March 30, 2008

Another School Bus Rollover: Time for Seat Belts

When a schoolteacher jumps to take the wheel after the driver passes out, let's applaud the teacher's quick action, but let's also ask why most school buses have no seat belts.  Listen to this account of the incident and consider all the ways seat belts could have helped minimize serious injuries:

SPRINGVILLE, Ala. —  The driver of a bus carrying 44 children on a field trip passed out at the wheel, and a teacher's quick actions kept the vehicle from careening into oncoming traffic, students said.

Math teacher Amy King grabbed the steering wheel and tried to straighten the swerving coach, witnesses told The Birmingham News.

The crash Friday sent 20 people to the hospital, including the driver and King.

King was thrown through the windshield and airlifted to UAB Hospital, where she was listed in serious condition, officials said.

"She jumped over and pulled the wheel," said Alix Romano, a Bryan Elementary School fifth-grader who sat near the front of the bus.

The bus, owned by Adventure Bus Charter & Tours Inc. of Sumiton, was headed north to Chattanooga's Tennessee Aquarium. It was the lead bus in a caravan with two other charter buses hired by the Morris school and cars driven by chaperones.

The bus sideswiped 200 feet of guardrail before it came to rest upside down in a drainage ditch about 30 miles northeast of Birmingham.

Wreckers had to lift the bus off one child, Springville Fire Chief Richard Harvey said. The wreck is being investigated by Alabama State Troopers.

First, kids were thrown from side to side as the bus swerved before the final crash.  In the crash, the bus turned over completely.  The bus then had to be lifted off a child who had presumably flown out a window or door.  Most of these horrors could have been prevented or minimized if every child had been buckled in with the same kind of seat belt that is mandatory on all passenger cars.

By the way, this was a charter bus, so there is a possibility that it had seat belts.  Based on early reports, it sounds as if most of the children suffered injuries but will survive.  If there were seat belts on this charter bus, they undoubtedly helped in the rollover crash.  If there were no seat belts in use, it is rather amazing that there were not more fatalities in this crash.

To understand why seat belts are critical, check out this surveillance video of a minor school bus crash and watch what happens to kids' bodies during the crash.

Having reviewed the arguments for and against seat belts on school buses, I am underwhelmed by the arguments offered against seat belts, most of which have been long since rejected as fallacious when applied to passenger vehicles.  I am convinced that most of the so-called expert opinions offered against seat belt use on buses originate with school districts and governmental agencies that don't want to pay for seat belts, and some in the school bus industry itself.  There seems to be a concerted effort to gloss over the truth, but every now and then it slips out.  Here's an account of a tour bus crash involving elderly passengers just a few days ago that admits and explains the obvious:

The more seriously injured patients in the bus crash were flown to Sioux Falls for treatment. Avera McKennan hospital is treating ten of them.

Their injuries range from rib and spine fractures, to a head injury and a patient with a collapsed lung.

Dr. Don Wingert says if the elderly passengers would have been wearing seat belts, there could have been a lot fewer injuries.

Dr. Wingert says, “Everybody that was on the downside, got the people on the opposite side of the bus falling down on them. Certainly for what we saw, if seat belts were a regular part of buses, I think our injuries would be half or even much less than that.”

The arguments that are offered against seat belts just don't fly.  The main argument is that school buses are compartmentalized with high seat backs and padding, minimizing how far a kid can fly in a crash.  That argument has some merit for front and backward crashes (although a passenger restraint would make for a much softer impact than slamming against a seat back in the next row).  The compartmentalization argument makes no sense, however, when it comes to side impact crashes and rollovers.  If compartmentalization is so complete, how did a child fly out of a window in this latest accident and end up underneath the school bus?

Continue reading "Another School Bus Rollover: Time for Seat Belts" »

March 27, 2008

NAACP Says Kids Have a Right to Show Their Underwear in School

Do kids have a constitutional right to show their underwear in school?

The NAACP seems to think so.

The Florida branch of the NAACP says a bill that would ban students from wearing their pants too low could lead to more legal trouble for black males.

Orlando Senator Gary Siplin’s bill was approved 28-11 last week by the Florida Senate.

The bill calls for no criminal sanctions, but it would prohibit students from wearing pants low so that they expose undergarments.

Violators would receive a warning for a first offense, and suspensions from school would be issued for each subsequent infraction.

NAACP President Adora Obi Nweze called it a “clearly discriminatory bill.’’

Other groups such as the Advancement Project, a Washington social advocacy organization, say the proposal is directed primarily at black males and could lead to arrests.

Does the NAACP even remotely care about the negative consequences of letting black kids -- or any kids -- run around with their underwear showing?

Just off the top of my head, I can think of these consequences of not having a rule against pants that are so low they show a student's underwear: 

  • Encouraging a total lack of discipline.
  • Inviting promiscuity, lewd dress and inappropriate behavior.
  • Harrassment and embarrassment of other students and teachers.  Why should kids who dress appropriately and try to follow the rules have to spend their days in the classroom with other kids who are constantly showing their underwear?
  • Lack of self-esteem.
  • Failing to prepare kids for the ordinary requirements of the working world, like pants.
  • Encouraging defiance of the authority of teachers and principals.

The law is discriminatory?  That's total nonsense.  If kids are allowed to run wild and show their underwear in school all day, that will only encourage and invite discrimination against those kids, now and in the future.

The NAACP is working against the best interests of black kids in this case.  If I were a black youth in a school that currently tolerates such behavior, I can think of no worse enemy of my current and future happiness and success than the NAACP.

February 21, 2008

Van That Hit Minn. School Bus Had Illegal Alien Driver -- and Bus Had No Seat Belts

It's appalling that four children were killed, and additional children crtically injured, in a Minnesota school bus crash this week.

Continue reading "Van That Hit Minn. School Bus Had Illegal Alien Driver -- and Bus Had No Seat Belts" »

Duke LaCrosse Players Sue Duke University

From Bloomberg:

Duke University will be sued by 38 members of the 2006 men's lacrosse team who claim they suffered emotional distress when school officials failed to support them during a rape investigation, a spokesman for the players said.

The new Duke Lawsuit website is here.

Continue reading "Duke LaCrosse Players Sue Duke University" »

Columbia "Noose" Professor Reportedly Sanctioned for Plagiarism

Noteworthy:  Columbia U. Noose Professor Sanctioned for Fraud

February 13, 2008

High School Calls All 2,550 Students to Detention

This gives a new meaning to "No Child Left Behind":  A high school calls all 2,250 students to Saturday detention.

So a Donkey and a RINO Walked Into a Debate . . .

I was listening to Mark Levin's February 12th show online last night (archives here), as he explained, quite accurately, why closing Guantanamo and moving its detainees to U.S. soil, as John McCain has proposed, would likely hand a full panoply of U.S. Constitutional rights to terrorists actively attempting to destroy the United States.

At that moment, an unpleasant vision popped into my mind.

I saw a presidential debate.

I saw John McCain, Republican standard-bearer, on one side, and I saw a Democract -- Hillary or Obama, it doesn't matter -- on the other side.

And I saw the two candidates -- McCain and his Democratic adversary -- agreeing with one another.

I saw John McCain agreeing with the Democratic candidate on global warming. 

And on Guantanamo.

And on illegal immigration.

And many other things.

It is not a pleasant vision.

We might as well have a debate with a Donkey and a RINO on the left and an empty podium on the right.  That would sum up the choices nicely.

Mccain_squint

December 02, 2007

The New Republic's Fog of Arrogance

The New Republic has finally admitted that it can no longer stand by the accuracy of stories it published over five months ago in which an American soldier, Scott Thomas Beauchamp, made wild derogatory claims about soldiers serving with him in Iraq.

It takes The New Republic 14 pages of online text (roughly 10,000 words) to finally get to the painful bottom line admission:

In retrospect, we never should have put Beauchamp in this situation. He was a young soldier in a war zone, an untried writer without journalistic training. We published his accounts of sensitive events while granting him the shield of anonymity--which, in the wrong hands, can become license to exaggerate, if not fabricate.

When I last spoke with Beauchamp in early November, he continued to stand by his stories. Unfortunately, the standards of this magazine require more than that. And, in light of the evidence available to us, after months of intensive re-reporting, we cannot be confident that the events in his pieces occurred in exactly the manner that he described them. Without that essential confidence, we cannot stand by these stories.

It's nice that The New Republic has finally admitted the obvious, but it should not get off the hook this easily.  It is not "the standards of this magazine" that brought Beauchamp's story down.  It is the diligence and determination of bloggers, especially Confederate Yankee.  (Among others who pressed the story were Michael Goldfarb at the Weekly Standard, Ace of Spades, and Michelle Malkin.)

What's left in tatters is The New Republic's credibility.  The magazine left its readers hanging for over five months on this story, even though major factual innacuracies were known long ago.  During that time, TNR's reaction to the controversy was alternately to sneer at, or to ignore, its critics.

The New Republic blames this fiasco on "The Fog of War."

No, it's more like "The Fog of Vision-Clouding Bias," the "Fog of Inability to Take Responsibility" and, most of all, "The Fog of Arrogance."

Sadly, the fog still lingers at The New Republic.

November 29, 2007

Sudan Sentences Teddy Bear Teacher

Gibbons_teacher_sudan Apparently the British teacher who inadvertently offended Islamic radicals in Sudan by allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Mohammed" will not be flogged.

If the lead sentences of this news story are correct, British teacher Gillian Gibbons has been convicted of inciting religious hatred and sentenced to 15 days in jail, followed by deportation.  (The news story is a bit garbled at the moment, containing the news of the sentence followed by a lengthy discussion of the teacher's anticipated defense.  Presumably the story is in the process of being updated to reflect the breaking news.)

By the way, one cannot help but note the speed of Sudanese "justice."  Arrested on Sunday, sentenced on Thursday.  Whew!  The American justice system is often far too slow, but going from arrest to trial and sentencing in four days seems a bit too speedy. 

In this case, however, the swiftness of Sudanese "justice" is probably for the best, since allowing this case to fester while Islamic radicals continued to lobby for the teacher to be punished severely would not exactly be conducive to her life and safety.

The latest story contains more details of the "offense":

Gibbons was teaching her pupils, who are around age 7, about animals, and asked one of them to bring in her teddy bear, according to Robert Boulos, the director for Unity High School.

Gibbons asked the students to pick names for it and they proposed Abdullah, Hassan and Muhammad, and in September, the pupils voted to name it Muhammad, he said.

Each child was allowed to take the bear home on weekends and write a diary about what they did with it. The diary entries were collected in a book with the bear's picture on the cover, labeled, "My Name is Muhammad," he said. The bear itself was never labeled with the name, he added.

Gibbons was trying to teach the children writing skills, using a method shared by good teachers all around the world.  Her students picked the bear's name themselves, and a boy in the class said the teddy bear was named after him, not after Mohammed himself.

The punishment of 15 days in jail and deportation is harsh, but not as harsh as the 40 lashes the woman originally faced.

Although Sudan gets some credit for not punishing this teacher as mercilessly as it often does in such cases, its punishment is still the kind that harms everyone involved. 

The children are harmed by the sudden and punitive loss of an excellent teacher.  The harm to the teacher is self-evident.  Meanwhile, Sudan looks ridiculous for having treated an inadvertent slight in such a draconian manner.  Sudan will have a very hard time attracting additional teachers of similar caliber from the West.  Indeed, professionals of all kinds are even more likely to avoid Sudan like the plague it has become, if they value their own freedom and safety.  So for its efforts Sudan will earn less educated children, greater isolation, and a weaker economy.  Good going, Sudan. 

Once again Sudan is demonstrating that building and improving things is difficult, but destroying things is easy.  It's a secret shared by all terrorists.

Update 1:  This AP story corrects the earlier report to state that the teacher was convicted of the lesser charge of insulting Islam, not of inciting religious hatred.  It's certainly appropriate that there was on conviction for inciting religious hatred.  If you want to find an example of someone inciting religious hatred, you'd have to look at the other side -- the prosecutors and hardliners who egged them on in pursing this case.  When you jail and deport a woman for accidentally insulting your faith, you are certainly stoking the fires of religious hatred.

Update 2:  A CNN report is here.

October 11, 2007

13-Year Old's Science Project Helps Find Cure for Dog Cancer

You may think you're kid's latest science project was pretty cool, but did she help discover a cure for dog cancer?

A 13-year old California girl could have a lasting impact on future medical breakthroughs. Her science fair project could help find a cure for canine cancer.

When 13-year-old Allison Reed was deciding on a topic for her science fair project, she was inspired by her Golden Retriever, Sassy, who died from bladder cancer at the young age of three.

Allison said, "I wanted to know why she died of cancer. So last year, I looked at her p53 gene and it's the stop gene, and then this year I looked at her gmcsf gene, which is her immune gene."

"Allison's the type of child that's always, why did this happen and how can we help our puppies and future puppies," said her mother Rebecca Reed.

For about a year, Allison worked on her project by first extracting the mutated cancer genes from her dog's tumor, and then isolating the cancer-fighting gene.

Finally, she was able to clone that gene with the hope it can be useful in creating a vaccine for dogs.

Allison's step-father, John Levy said "It's an opportunity I wish that all students had."

Levy is not only Allison's step-father, but also her science project sponsor.

Most of Allison's work was done at a biotech company where Allison's step-father and her mother are scientists, working on cancer treatments.

"We're expecting great things from Allison," said Levy.

Allison, you've made us all proud of you, but you've also set an awfully high bar for this year's science projects all across America and around the globe.

Now, I am a pretty smart person myself, but here was my elementary school science project:

Take three kernels of corn.  Put one kernel in each of three baby food jars.  Water them all.  One corn kernel gets no soil.  One kernel gets no light.  One kernel gets no air (except what was in the jar -- I didn't have access to vacuum-packing machinery).

Wait a week or two, add a few explanatory labels, and take the pitiful results to school.

Granted, that was my second grade project, but they didn't get much better from there.

Clearly there is only one solution if our kids are to have a chance to shine in their science fairs this spring.  We need to hire them out as lab assistants to research scientists.

September 04, 2007

Big Government Running Wild in the U.K.

Big government is running wild in the U.K. -- with predictably worse and worse results.  Get a gander of the latest proposals from the Conservative party to save Britain's socialized medicine scheme -- along with its failing schools and failing public housing scheme:

Patients who refuse to change their unhealthy lifestyles should not be treated by the NHS, the Conservatives said today.

In a bid to ease spiralling levels of obesity and other health concerns, a Tory panel said certain treatments should be denied to patients who refuse to co-operate with health professionals and live healthier lifestyles.

And those who do manage to improve their general health by losing weight and quitting smoking, for example, would receive "Health Miles" cards.

Points earned could then be used to pay for health-related products such as gym membership and fresh vegetables.

The aim is a shift in the NHS towards preventing disease and ill-health rather than having to treat it.

The proposal was one of a raft of measures suggested in a review of public services, ordered by David Cameron.

The 200-page study, entitled Restoring Pride in Our Public Services, was carried out by the Conservative public services improvement policy group's review co-chaired by former health secretary Stephen Dorrell and leading educationalist Baroness Perry.

"It is inconsistent with the concept of the responsible citizen to imagine that it is realistic for citizens, having paid their taxes, to expect that the state will underwrite the health implications of any lifestyle decision they choose to make," the report states.

Along with the health proposals were a raft of suggested changes in education and housing.

Smaller schools, it has been suggested, would improve overall results.

In cases where pupil numbers are falling large schools in the centre of London and other cities would be closed, rather than smaller schools in outlying areas. Inner city pupils could be transported to schools in the suburbs and even villages to ensure they remain open.

"Schools within schools" could be created to tackle poor discipline, particularly in large schools, national targets could be reduced and struggling pupils could be forced to repeat their final year at primary school.

Former chief inspector of schools Lady Perry said: "Every time we have a cutting back of numbers in schools, the knee-jerk reaction is to close all the little village schools or suburban schools and bus all the pupils into great big city schools.

"Schools are getting bigger and bigger. All the evidence is that discipline, achievement and standards are better in small schools than they are in big ones. So why don't we instead close the great big city school if numbers start to fall and bus the children out to the villages?

Is it any coincidence that two of the biggest programs the government controls in Britain -- the medical system and the schools -- are a total mess?

When socialized medicine fails, the "solution" is to impose tighter and tighter arbitrary controls on patients.

How will those controls work?  Will everyone who engages in behaviors the medical establishment deems high risk -- from high risk pregnancies to alternative lifestyles -- be denied medical care?  Or will only certain unhealthy lifestyles be penalized, while other "politically correct" unhealthy lifestyles receive a free pass?  The potential for abuse is staggering.

Besides, even those with very healthy lifestyles can, and do, become seriously ill.  Penalizing unhealthy lifestyles will only get you so far.  At some point, doctors must be able to treat successfully the inevitable diseases of birth, childhood, adulthood, and aging.  That is where socialized medicine predictably fails,

And what is the proposed reward for Britons who have an excellent lifestyle?  A coupon for free vegetables and a gym membership.  Good grief. 

You work hard, take care of your health, and save the system thousands of dollars a year and you get  . . . a coupon for turnips.  Nice.

It's almost funny.

July 25, 2007

Leftist Professor Ward Churchill Fired; Students Breathe Sigh of Relief

A grievous loss to the halls of academia? 

A blow to intellectual rigor itself?

A challenge to freedom of speech?

Not exactly.

"Blame-the-9/11-Victims" Professor Ward Churchill is fired.

Continue reading "Leftist Professor Ward Churchill Fired; Students Breathe Sigh of Relief" »

July 18, 2007

If Al Qaeda Is "Evolving," Why Can't America's Iraq Strategy Evolve Too?

Here's what passes for the conventional wisdom on Iraq:  The war was badly planned and therefore is failing miserably.  As a result, America's only option is to fold up the entire operation and slink away, leaving the Iraqis to whatever bloodbath awaits them.  We've reached the point of no return; the war is irretrievably lost; and no amount of rethinking or redoubling of effort will make any difference.

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda's early losses in the war on terror, including the deaths of major leaders such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and possibly Osama Bin Ladin himself, are completely irrelevant, since Al Qaeda is "evolving" constantly and is planning mass casualty attacks on the U.S.:

Al Qaeda terrorists are rebuilding their capabilities and continuing to plan mass-casualty attacks inside the United States, according to an intelligence assessment made public yesterday.

"We assess [al Qaeda] has protected or regenerated key elements of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in ... Pakistan [tribal areas], operational lieutenants and its top leadership," according to the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus analysis of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

"Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al Qaeda senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al Qaeda will intensify its efforts to put operatives here," the report stated.

Retired Vice Adm. Michael McConnell, the director of national intelligence whose office produced the NIE, said the United States will face a "persistent and evolving terrorist threat" in the next three years.

The seven-page public summary of the classified report said the United States is in a "heightened threat environment."

"They're working as hard as they can in positioning trained operatives here in the United States," Mr. McConnell said. "They have recruitment programs to bring recruits into [the tribal] region of Pakistan [who] could come to the United States, fit into the population and then use some of the training that they receive in the Pakistani area for explosives and so on."

Is the contrast between the defeatism of the media in viewing America's chances in the Iraq war and the endless optimism for Al Qaeda's chances stark enough for you?

Al Qaeda remains a threat because it is "continuing to plan" further attacks and "will intensify its efforts" and its members are "working as hard as they can."

But when it comes to the Iraq war, working harder, intensifying efforts, rethinking, and continuing to plan are off the table for the United States.  The only option we have is to rip our leaders from limb to limb, metaphorically speaking, for having started the war.  Since things look bleak now, they're going to stay that way no matter what America does, and its only option is to turn tail and run.

Don't tell me we've tried long enough and hard enough in Iraq and there's no point in continuing any longer.  Nonsense.  Al Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. predate the Iraq war, but nobody seems to be pulling out a stopwatch and insisting that Al Qaeda's chances of striking a mortal blow at the U.S. or the West are forever lost.

What a fitting metaphor is Harry Reid's surrender slumberthon in the Senate tonight.  Harry Reid knows how to lose a war he has already declared lost.  The solution is quite simple:  Lie down, accept defeat, and make no effort to prevail.

In the real world, the margin between victory and defeat is rarely great, but the outcome matters a great deal.  The margin of victory usually turns on one thing:  motivation.  If we are motivated to win; if we are determined; if we are constantly "rebuilding our capabilities" and "continuing to plan" and "intensifying our efforts  and "working as hard as we can," then there are very few forces on earth that can stand in our way.

By the same token, if we are frequently announcing that we've already lost and that our cause is hopeless, and holding slumberthons to protest our own nation's continued effort to prevail, then we certainly can bring about our own defeat.

Update:  Today brings a stunningly important speech from Senator John McCain (via Captain's Quarters):

Mr. President, we have nearly finished this little exhibition, which was staged, I assume, for the benefit of a briefly amused press corps and in deference to political activists opposed to the war who have come to expect from Congress such gestures, empty though they may be, as proof that the majority in the Senate has heard their demands for action to end the war in Iraq. The outcome of this debate, the vote we are about to take, has never been in doubt to a single member of this body. And to state the obvious, nothing we have done for the last twenty-four hours will have changed any facts on the ground in Iraq or made the outcome of the war any more or less important to the security of our country. The stakes in this war remain as high today as they were yesterday; the consequences of an American defeat are just as grave; the costs of success just as dear. No battle will have been won or lost, no enemy will have been captured or killed, no ground will have been taken or surrendered, no soldier will have survived or been wounded, died or come home because we spent an entire night delivering our poll-tested message points, spinning our soundbites, arguing with each other, and substituting our amateur theatrics for statesmanship. All we have achieved are remarkably similar newspaper accounts of our inflated sense of the drama of this display and our own temporary physical fatigue. Tomorrow the press will move on to other things and we will be better rested. But nothing else will have changed.

In Iraq, American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are still fighting bravely and tenaciously in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces’ storied past. Our enemies will still be intent on defeating us, and using our defeat to encourage their followers in the jihad they wage against us, a war which will become a greater threat to us should we quit the central battlefield in defeat. The Middle East will still be a tinderbox, which our defeat could ignite in a regional war that will imperil our vital interests at risk there and draw us into a longer and far more costly war. The prospect of genocide in Iraq, in which we will be morally complicit, is still as real a consequence of our withdrawal today as it was yesterday.

During our extended debate over the last few days, I have heard senators repeat certain arguments over and over again. My friends on the other side of this argument accuse those of us who oppose this amendment with advocating “staying the course,” which is intended to suggest that we are intent on continuing the mistakes that have put the outcome of the war in doubt. Yet we all know that with the arrival of General Petraeus we have changed course. We are now fighting a counterinsurgency strategy, which some of us have argued we should have been following from the beginning, and which makes the most effective use of our strength and does not strengthen the tactics of our enemy. This new battle plan is succeeding where our previous tactics have failed, although the outcome remains far from certain. The tactics proposed in the amendment offered by my friends, Senators Levin and Reed – a smaller force, confined to bases distant from the battlefield, from where they will launch occasional search and destroy missions and train the Iraqi military – are precisely the tactics employed for most of this war and which have, by anyone’s account, failed miserably. Now, that, Mr. President, is staying the course, and it is a course that inevitably leads to our defeat and the catastrophic consequences for Iraq, the region and the security of the United States our defeat would entail.

Yes, we have heard quite a lot about the folly of “staying the course,” though the real outcome should this amendment prevail and be signed into law, would be to deny our generals and the Americans they have the honor to command the ability to try, in this late hour, to address the calamity these tried and failed tactics produced, and salvage from the wreckage of our previous failures a measure of stability for Iraq and the Middle East, and a more secure future for the American people.

I have also listened to my colleagues on the other side repeatedly remind us that the American people have spoken in the last election. They have demanded we withdraw from Iraq, and it is our responsibility to do, as quickly as possible, what they have bid us to do. But is that our primary responsibility? Really, Mr. President, is that how we construe our role: to follow without question popular opinion even if we believe it to be in error, and likely to endanger the security of the country we have sworn to defend? Surely, we must be responsive to the people who have elected us to office, and who, if it is their wish, will remove us when they become unsatisfied with our failure to heed their demands. I understand that, of course. And I understand why so many Americans have become sick and tired of this war, given the many, many mistakes made by civilian and military leaders in its prosecution. I, too, have been made sick at heart by these mistakes and the terrible price we have paid for them. But I cannot react to these mistakes by embracing a course of action that I know will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will -- and I am as sure of this as I am of anything – seriously endanger the people I represent and the country I have served all my adult life. I have many responsibilities to the people of Arizona, and to all Americans. I take them all seriously, Mr. President, or try to. But I have one responsibility that outweighs all the others – and that is to do everything in my power, to use whatever meager talents I posses, and every resource God has granted me to protect the security of this great and good nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. And that I intend to do, Mr. President, even if I must stand athwart popular opinion. I will explain my reasons to the American people. I will attempt to convince as many of my countrymen as I can that we must show even greater patience, though our patience is nearly exhausted, and that as long as there is a prospect for not losing this war, then we must not choose to lose it. That is how I construe my responsibility to my constituency and my country. That is how I construed it yesterday. It is how I construe it today. And it is how I will construe it tomorrow. I do not know how I could choose any other course.

I cannot be certain that I possess the skills to be persuasive. I cannot be certain that even if I could convince Americans to give General Petraeus the time he needs to determine whether we can prevail, that we will prevail in Iraq. All I am certain of is that our defeat there would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us, and that I cannot be complicit in it, but must do whatever I can, whether I am effective or not, to help us try to avert it. That, Mr. President, is all I can possibly offer my country at this time. It is not much compared to the sacrifices made by Americans who have volunteered to shoulder a rifle and fight this war for us. I know that, and am humbled by it, as we all are. But though my duty is neither dangerous nor onerous, it compels me nonetheless to say to my colleagues and to all Americans who disagree with me: that as long as we have a chance to succeed we must try to succeed.

I am privileged, as we all are, to be subject to the judgment of the American people and history. But, my friends, they are not always the same judgment. The verdict of the people will arrive long before history’s. I am unlikely to ever know how history has judged us in this hour. The public’s judgment of me I will know soon enough. I will accept it, as I must. But whether it is favorable or unforgiving, I will stand where I stand, and take comfort from my confidence that I took my responsibilities to my country seriously, and despite the mistakes I have made as a public servant and the flaws I have as an advocate, I tried as best I could to help the country we all love remain as safe as she could be in an hour of serious peril.

July 07, 2007

Al Gore's Theories Still Not So Hot

This pretty much speaks for itself:

Gore:  Ignorant or Dishonest?

A good question.  However, I don't see why the two are mutually exclusive.

After responding to Gore's claim that atmospheric carbon is responsible for high temperatures on Venus, George Reisman writes:

It is on the basis of such ignorance or dishonesty that you declare that

we should demand that the United States join an international treaty within the next two years that cuts global warming pollution by 90 percent in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy Earth. (Italics added.)

The “global warming pollution” you talk about is the production of the energy that lights, heats, and air conditions our homes, powers our automobiles, trucks, trains, airplanes, and ships, runs our refrigerators, television sets, computers, and all other electrical appliances, and powers the machinery and equipment that produces all of the goods we buy. You want to cut this by a staggering percentage!

. . . .

If you understood in personal terms what you are talking about, you would know that your supposedly glorious “spiritual challenge” is a call for Mrs. Gore to scrub your laundry (if you would still have any) against a rock on the bank of a river, the way women do in Third World countries. That’s the actual meaning and measure of your “spiritual challenge.” You want to turn our glorious economic system into a poverty-stricken hell-hole.

Update 1:

In related news, scientists taking ice core samples from Greenland are discovering that Greenland was once much greener than it is today:

Ice-covered Greenland really was green a half-million or so years ago, covered with forests in a climate much like that of Sweden and eastern Canada today.

An international team of researchers recovered ancient DNA from the bottom of an ice core that indicates the presence of pine, yew and alder trees as well as insects.

The researchers, led by Eske Willerslev of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, say this is the first proof that there was forest in southern Greenland.

Included were genetic traces of butterflies, moths, flies and beetles, they report in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

As Ed Morrissey points out:

That has some implications for the climate-change debate. Advocates of anthropogenic climate change use Greenland as key evidence in their argument. They claim that the loss of Greenland's glacial mass -- which is still in dispute -- shows the effect that mankind has had on the Earth's climate. If Greenland's glaciers have only recently formed, then that argument makes little sense.

Update 2:  Some of the scientific data offered in support of claims of global warming was addressed on Sean Hannity's show.

Update 3:  If you haven't seen it already, check out the new guest post from Democracy Rules:  THE GORE-Y TRUTH.

Attack on Clarence Thomas Betrays Subtle Bias in Surprising Places

In Friday's Best of the Web, James Taranto does a terrific job of addressing an attack on Clarence Thomas by Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman for failing to support affirmative action.

Goodman writes:

Thomas's psyche still intrigues those who search for the biography in his opinions. We know Thomas as a man who benefited from the affirmative action he scorns. He attended Holy Cross with a scholarship established for blacks after the death of Martin Luther King Jr. He was accepted to Yale Law School, where a program committed 10 percent of the seats to minorities. . . .

James Taranto responds:

Let's focus on one of Goodman's tropes: "We know Thomas as a man who benefited from the affirmative action he scorns." Goodman implies, and others among his critics have stated directly, that because Thomas (purportedly) "benefited from affirmative action"--that is, from racial discrimination in favor of blacks--he is morally obliged to favor such discrimination, and to hold it constitutional.

Ellen Goodman is a person of pallor, and her bio tells us that she finished college in 1963, the year before the Civil Rights Act became law. Thus she is old enough (sorry, Ellen) to have benefited from discrimination because she is white. Would anyone suggest that therefore she is morally obliged to support discrimination in favor of whites? Of course not.

In the white liberal's worldview, if a white past beneficiary of discrimination favors racial equality or even discrimination against whites, that is an act of atonement or principle. But if a black past beneficiary of discrimination favors equality, white liberals view him as a traitor to his race. To put it another way, white liberals expect blacks to act out of self-interest based on race, while they expect whites to act altruistically. They attack blacks like Thomas who rise above racial self-interest--and they do so in explicitly racial terms--while faulting whites who fail to do so.

This may be the most invidious racial view to remain respectable in 21st century America. The idea that whites are on a higher moral plane than blacks is a form of white supremacy; and the attacks on Thomas and other blacks who embrace equality and reject racial self-interest are an attempt to keep black people in their place.

White liberals often claim that racism is everywhere, "just beneath the surface." Given the intensity with which they target blacks who reject liberal orthodoxy on race, one suspects they are telling the truth--about themselves.

Excellent analysis, extremely well put.

June 12, 2007

More on the "100 Words Every High School Graduate Should Know"

Dr. Melissa Clouthier offers her thoughts on that list of words that every high school graduate "should" know.  She points out that the list seems to have a bit of a political tilt.  It is odd that the word "impeach" found its way onto the list.  It's not a particularly challenging word for high school grads to know.

NEWS & BUZZ

DAILY CARTOON click to enlarge
ANDERTOONS.COM DAILY CARTOONS

WEBSITES TO EXPLORE

  • Blogroll Me!

    "New!" websites were updated within the last 6 hours

SUPPORT OUR ADVERTISERS

GINA COBB

  • The 2006 Weblog Awards
  • "This is a great blog." (Jack Jones)
  • ". . . Gina Cobb is proof that not all lawyers deserve the death penalty." (Gringoman.com)(Gee -- thanks!)
  • "Let the charming and talented Gina Cobb show you how important rhetorical argument can be." (No-Pasaran.blogspot.com)